Beware dihydrogen monoxide in your water supply!

quote:Olathe official calls radio station prank "a terrorist attack." 04/02/2002

Olathe, Kan. (AP) -- A city water official says a radio station April Fools Day prank that caused some residents to think their water supply was unfit for drinking and even bathing was akin to "a terrorist attack."

Jerald Robnett, the city's superintendent of water protection, said his department received calls from 150 customers Monday after KQRC reported the water contained "high levels of a naturally occurring substance," dihydrogen monoxide, that causes increased urination, profuse sweating and wrinkling of hands and feet. Boiling the water long enough would get rid of the substance, however.

City officials said about 30 residents called 911.

Technically, radio personalities Johnny Dare and Murphy Wells had their facts straight. Dihydrogen monoxide is a scientific name for water. It can cause the "symptoms" described, and boiling will make it go away.

But the April Fool's Day gag upset Robnett so much that he said, "It's a terrorist act as far as I'm concerned.

"It's like going to the airport and shouting that you have a gun. It's stupidity."

City Manager Michael Wilkes called the joke irresponsible and said it jeopardized public safety.

KQRC program director Neal Mirsky said that as soon as the station realized there was a problem, "we pulled the plug on it."

"We didn't intend for any of this," he said. "We thought a couple of people would go to work without a shower."

Dare and Wells, known for their stunts, announced the "contamination" at 6:30 a.m. and revealed the prank about 8 a.m.

some people need to fucking learn to take a joke... they're all just pissed b/c they're too stupid to realize that they were duped

"It's like going to the airport and shouting that you have a gun. It's stupidity." ... riiiight. it's *just* like that... :shakehead: some people's kids

do you really see anything wrong with this? it it their fault that so many people are stupid? just because so many dumb people complained doesn't make it a terrorists act.... sheesh....

But yes, far too many people have 911 and/or their lawyers on speed dial these days. Too busy watching Jerry Springer to think for themselves I guess. And you just know there's going to be pressure to fire them for it.

First of all one of my jobs is PR for the Philadelphia Water Department so I knew exactly what was meant. Second, it's a rather elitist attitude to assume everyone has the wealth of knowledge you possess.

I'm with Meursault's Head on this. Just because some people are ignorant of basic chemistry doesn't make it any less irresponsible for the radio station to have capitalized on that ignorance.

They got the result they wanted from the joke, to panic the ignorant. As such they should be held accountable for tying up the 911 phone lines. Which I think in most jurisdictions is at least a misdemeanor charge.

capitalize? wtf are you talking about?? it's not like they were doing that and then selling bottled water to them.... it was a harmless joke, and shame on them for getting their panties in a bunch and calling it "terrorism".

and how is it their fault that people called 911? do you blame orson wells for the mass hysteria that ensued from war of the worlds? it's not their fault that people called 911. why in the WORLD would you call 911 about that anyway? if you believe that it's a serious announcement made by a reputable radio station, then why call 911? don't you think they'd know already?

NO. They'd have said it was in poor taste or at worst causing a public disturbance......

Personally I think that leaping on such a bandwagon is more offensive than a prank on April fools day. I know I spend the whole day ignoring anything contentious and check if it makes the next days news. But then maybe I have a clue (oh I did like the one in the gaming forum)

Granted, terrorism is a bit harsh. But I can imagine the nightmare I'd go through if such a stunt was pulled here. Plus, if asked, many people wouldn't even remember what supposedly contaminated their water when they heard the announcement - just that is was contaminated.

quote:Originally posted by brodie: capitalize? wtf are you talking about?? it's not like they were doing that and then selling bottled water to them.... it was a harmless joke, and shame on them for getting their panties in a bunch and calling it "terrorism".

and how is it their fault that people called 911? do you blame orson wells for the mass hysteria that ensued from war of the worlds? it's not their fault that people called 911

Capitalize as in "leveraging" peoples ignorance to reach their goal. Not make money off it. It was a joke but the result was 30 calls to 911. Sure calling it "terrorism" is stupid. But they are still responsible and should be punished.

What if their prank had been to set off a fire alarm that prompted 30 911 calls? Is that worse because it isn't as "clever" as their chemistry lesson. No, because the result would have been the same.

quote:What if their prank had been to set off a fire alarm that prompted 30 911 calls? Is that worse because it isn't as "clever" as their chemistry lesson.

yes, b/c then they'd be directly responsible for wasting the town's resources as the fire dept was called out to a fire that never existed. let's place the blame where it belongs: square on the shoulders on those people who called 911.nobody forced them to call. this is the problem: everybody's always too willing to blame somebody else and push the responsablity on somebody else these days. you're a perfect example.

and my question still goes unanswered: why would you call 911? if the department of public health or something got swamped with calls, and something happened there, maybe, MAYBE i could see some fault there at the radio station. but 911? please answer me as to why 911 should have been called

911 is where you would be expected to turn for centralized information if the report had been true. Operators would have been briefed with information, lists of what to do and where to call for other information if necessary.

Punished? For what exactly? Calling people on their gullibility? Pulling a prank... on April Fool's Day no less?

Fuck that. Grow a sense of humor for fuck's sake.

And they should in no way be blamed for people calling 911. Who the FUCK would call 911 when there's a huge catastrophe announced on the radio? Like the radio station wouldn't do it themselves (if they were informed by emergency services to begin with).

but why would you call 911 for information about contaminated water supply THAT WAS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT? for that matter, even if it wasn't known about, i'd think poison control or public health dept would be better people to call.... but that's just me. i like to think about things before answering

quote: 911 is where you would be expected to turn for centralized information if the report had been true. Operators would have been briefed with information, lists of what to do and where to call for other information if necessary.

It is? Since when? I thought it was the number you called when you personally needed emergency help. Aren't there better ways of distributing information to a mass of people?

quote:personally, if i were really that worried, i'd call some city office about it, or the department of water something-or-other. i think 911 would be just about the last number i'd think to call...

Yeah, me too.

quote:What if their prank had been to set off a fire alarm that prompted 30 911 calls? Is that worse because it isn't as "clever" as their chemistry lesson. No, because the result would have been the same.

Well, see, there's the thing... with a fire, the emergency response agencies need to be informed. With information on the radio, I'd be willing to bet that the emergency response agencies already know and/or have it at least partially under control. At least with this prank it was... oh, you know, funny.

Besides... it was 30 calls. Out of how many listeners? Out of how large a 911 Capacity? It's not like they were jam-packed for hours.

In cases in which the entire city population (or large portion thereof) is threatened a central command center takes control. You would have representatives from public health, water, police, fire, etc in one location to provide organized answers and the number there would be 911 - it's what people know. It both saves the citizen the time of looking up the number of what proper department he thinks he should call and allows the city to centralize it's response.

This is how Philly works and I'd hazard a guess that other municipalities operate in a similar fashion.

What seems to me to be possibly the most relevant piece of information here is something that's not really addressed in the article at all. The nature of this prank changes dramatically given its presentation. If these guys were on the radio feigning panic, well then perhaps the airport/gun metaphor holds up. But if they just mentioned it a few times like it wasn't such a big deal, I think it could be more like putting a woopie cushion on a chair at the airport. I have no idea what actually happened, but I'd bet that the station probably has tape of the whole thing. Of course, from what I've heard, most morning radio "personalities" are tremendous jackasses, and it's easy to imagine that these guys are no exception. As for anyone who calls 911 based on what some Howard Stern wannabe says...no comment.

Not everyone remembers their chemistry class, and this prank really says nothing besdies that fact. If I had said on the radio that everyone had already been exposed to "adaptive radiation," there would have only been a few people who remembered a chapter on evolution in biology class.

YUK YUK YUK! They didn't remember the term! Stupid heads! [/sarcasm].

It was a bad joke, and they should apologize on air, and be charged with a misdemeanor.

TERRORISM?! Oh, for fuck's sake. Is *every-damn-thing* terrorism now? Cripes, as if we weren't already rapidly on our way to becoming a nation of candy-asses, crybabies, victims & shirkers before 9/11. Wanna know what terrifies me? That so many people apparently don't have a grasp of basic grade school chemistry, this is hardly master's thesis stuff here. Or that some douchebag of a public official would equate a *PRANK* that harmed *NO-ONE* with terrorism. Oops, this post might be considered terrorism. /me awaits inevitable lawsuits from people traumatized by exposure to their own friggin stupidity..

For the same reason that one can be arrested for crying "fire!" in a crowded theatre. That kind of speech is not protected. I'm not aware of the specific laws which cover such activities, but I'm quite aware of the precedent.

quote:They even stopped the joke of their own accord ~2 hours later.

After they had already panicked people, and 911 operators had been tied up dealing with bullshit. The fact that it was a joke does not excuse them to do whatever they like.

I think the "Fire" in a crowded theatre analogy is false. It's one thing to say "FIRE" when there is no fire, thereby causing a panic. Ergo, you lied, and you caused harm. However, it's different from saying a lot of 'true' things about H2O. And it's truth that there is Dihydrogen Monoxide in the water supply, because it IS water.

If there acutally is fire in a crowded theatre, then yelling "Fire" becomes a bit more useful.

quote:I think the "Fire" in a crowded theatre analogy is false. It's one thing to say "FIRE" when there is no fire, thereby causing a panic. Ergo, you lied, and you caused harm.

Exactly.

quote:However, it's different from saying a lot of 'true' things about H2O. And it's truth that there is Dihydrogen Monoxide in the water supply, because it IS water.

But it hasn't "contaminated" the water supply. Saying as much gives the impression that dihydrogen monoxide is something separate from water, because it is acting as a contaminate.

It's not at all different. The idea is one causes a public panic by knowingly misrepresenting the nature of the situation at hand. I could scream "bomb" in a theatre, when all I had was a small and spent smoke bomb that was entirely harmless. I've been truthful, right? I mean, there is a bomb, it's just not capable of doing anything. So don't arrest me officer!

I agree with AlphaMeridian on this one. Every single thing they said was absolutely the truth. I'd bet that if you told people that there was a good chance that you were breathing in molecular oxygen right now (which is a highly combustible odorless gas, that is used as rocket fuel in its liquid form), some of them would freak out too.

quote:I agree with AlphaMeridian on this one. Every single thing they said was absolutely the truth.

It's amazing how none of you want to look at this situtation in context. Yes, what they said was mostly truthful except the part about it being a genuine problem! That's the key. It was stated in such a manner so as to cause a public disturbance.

For instance:

WARNING: GOING OUTSIDE WILL EXPOSE YOU TO HARMFUL RADIATION. THIS IS A PUBLIC WARNING. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE!!!!!!

Now, technically, that's true. Going outside will expose you to UV radiation, which can contribute to skin cancer. The difference is the context. I have made it seem as though something out of the ordinary is going on, and that this is a public message, when it is nothing of the sort. If 100 people stay home from work that day, then I have to bear the responsibility for misinforming the public.

from what i understood about things, nobody ever said it was a genuine problem... AAMOF, they didn't even say "contamination".

they said, and i quote:

quote:after KQRC reported the water contained "high levels of a naturally occurring substance," dihydrogen monoxide, that causes increased urination, profuse sweating and wrinkling of hands and feet. Boiling the water long enough would get rid of the substance, however.

ALL they said was that the water contained water. no misleading there. they didn't say it was contaminated. they didn't say that it was harmful. they didn't say it was dangerous. people can inject whatever meaning that they'd like into what was said, but really at a loss to see where any wrongdoing was comitted.

WARNING: GOING OUTSIDE WILL EXPOSE YOU TO HARMFUL RADIATION. THIS IS A PUBLIC WARNING. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE!!!!!!

Now, technically, that's true. Going outside will expose you to UV radiation, which can contribute to skin cancer. The difference is the context. I have made it seem as though something out of the ordinary is going on, and that this is a public message, when it is nothing of the sort. If 100 people stay home from work that day, then I have to bear the responsibility for misinforming the public.

If it were a thetruth.org commercial, would it be illegal as well? I'm sure you've seen the cyanide TheTruth commercial proclaiming that it was killing people to have cyanide in their cigarettes. If I came out with another commercial that said there was cyanide in their drinking water (which there is, even in 'filtered' water that you buy off the shelf) would I then also be charged of a misdemeanor?

quote:If I came out with another commercial that said there was cyanide in their drinking water (which there is, even in 'filtered' water that you buy off the shelf) would I then also be charged of a misdemeanor?

It depends on how your portrayed it. If you portrayed it as an immediate public health threat, or something out of the ordinary, then yes.

That's not their words, it's a second-hand report of what was communicated. We'd have to read the transcript. And the context hasn't changed. They portrayed it as a problem, and as a public health threat.